HOFFMAN, Mr Rodney Colin, Private capacity

JAN, Mr David, Policy Development Manager, Local Government Association of the Northern Territory

TIMBER, Mr David, Private capacity

[16:11]

CHAIR: Welcome. We have three people who have said they wish to talk with us. We need to finish here by five o'clock, so people know that is the time. You have that process. I will not be pulling anyone up. Mr Hoffman, you have been here all day. I have seen that you have been very patient.

Mr Hoffman : I am the CDEP coordinator of Kalano, which is an Indigenous organisation in Katherine. I have come to speak on my own behalf. In relation to the proposed Stronger Futures legislation, as you may or may not be aware, over the last three years, the 2009-12 current CDEP under the remote services contract has had a lot of changes. The changes have caused a lot of confusion, particularly for me trying to run this program such as the recent announcement by Minister Macklin that the transitioning of everyone from wages onto Centrelink benefits is being put on hold until an announcement may be made in June.

We have spent the past year or two telling everyone that these things are going to happen, and it is not the only example. There have been plenty of examples over the last 2½ to three years where the government has made changes, backflipped or introduced new policies. All I want to say today is that hopefully, in relation to the legislation and the future of remote services and Stronger Futures, what the government says is what it will do.

As everyone here would probably be aware, the majority of our people have very low literacy and numeracy rates. Many of them, if not most, have English as a second language. We are telling people one thing then all of a sudden six months later or two months out from when it is supposed to be commencing we are telling them something different. It is hard enough for educated people to understand, let alone our community people who have English as a second language to understand the changes that are occurring. That is the point I wanted to make today.

I worked for family and community services, which I think is now the department of families and communities for four years, so I have a background in the welfare side of things. I have also worked in education, so I also have some things that I would like to say about that. As I have said, if government could be as close as possible when they make these policies and follow them through it would probably be a lot less confusing. They are very confusing times at the moment, with the transition to Centrelink not happening for a few more months. But in relation to things such as the SEAM program, government came out and spoke to our community people there at Kalano.

We look after the town communities around Katherine. We basically said, 'If you don't send your kids to school you'll be penalised,' blah, blah, blah. I would dare say that in the months after that announcement the people there were very scared, very worried. I bet my bottom dollar that the attendance rates at that time were probably close to 100 per cent. But then after a month—and I think Senator Scullion mentioned it earlier—there was not a lot of action after a year, because we are one of the trial towns. I think three actions were taken over a year, so three families out of thousands, or hundreds, where measures were taken to ensure that those children got to school.

After a month, when people noticed that these measures were not being implemented, things went back to normal, kids stopped going to school, parents stopped worrying about the government coming. I do not necessarily agree with punitive measures but, at the same time, government came out and said these things to our people there. It was pretty straightforward, people were jumping up and down, but then government did not follow through.

I just wanted to say that today. It has been a good day. I have learnt a lot. The doctor came up here before. A lot of those things are very evident in Katherine. A lot of it is just common sense. You can see it for yourself, just walking down the main street. With respect to the alcohol management plans, even one of the communities we service have had an alcohol management plan where, for the last three years—they are outside a prescribed area—they are only allowed light beers. But because that community and those people are travelling to Katherine and other places they have since had a rethink about their alcohol management plan and they want their people to be allowed to access further alcohol and whatever. It is not a one-fits-all solution and all communities basically need to have sets of rules for their own needs.

In terms of CDEP and employment and the changes over the last three years there has been great investment by government, particularly for Kalano. We have our farm back up and running. But if the changes still go ahead, people being income managed and everyone going onto Centrelink, it will make economic development a lot harder for us. We have got a few business proposals on the go. Being uncertain about the future of CDEP and whatnot has made it a bit harder for us to follow through on those sorts of things, because we do not know where our labour force is going to sit. A lot of our people are not interested in being on CDEP just for their Centrelink benefits. However, we have definitively told our people that there have been a lot of changes in the welfare system and there are probably still going to be a lot of changes. All those loopholes in the system that still exist at this point in time will close up and basically there will come a day where no-one will be able to run and hide.

CHAIR: Thank you, Mr Hoffman, and you can be assured that the issues around CDEP have been raised with us everywhere we have gone. Thank you very much for sharing with us and for being with us all day. Mr Jan?

Mr Jan : I represent the Local Government Association of the Northern Territory. I would like to thank the committee for allowing me to speak to them this afternoon. The association has produced a submission. I just want to go through and quickly highlight a few aspects of it. The association is a peak body representing interests and providing a voice for the 11 shires and five municipals of the Northern Territory. It coordinates activities on behalf of the local government sector as well as performing functions for other spheres of government that are designed to enhance the capacity of local government in the Northern Territory.

Stronger Futures has the potential to impact upon all councils in the Northern Territory in a variety of ways. Local governments are generally cost sensitive and, while other spheres of government are able to absorb major changes in their operating environments, NT councils often do not have that luxury. They cannot, for example, budget for a deficit, something that both the state and territory governments as well as the Commonwealth government often do. Councils are sensitive to changes in their operations, particularly if they impose increased costs in the short term and do not give councils the time to plan for that change. The handover of responsibility for infrastructure is often a case in point, especially if it is not completed to Australian standards and leaves councils with legacy issues which are beyond future cyclical maintenance and upgrading costs—costs that often can be planned for and managed. Grants that are only for one year that involve employment and do not cover council salary oncosts and administrative overheads are also a problem area for councils. They are often faced with the dilemma of deciding if they wish to continue running the programs associated with the grants—grants that are for one year only are not a great incentive for attracting and retaining staff in employment—or subsidising the programs themselves, usually from their often limited own-source revenues.

Municipal and shire councils differ greatly in terms of the make-up of their revenues and also in their functions. Municipal councils raise the majority of their revenue from rates and charges; whereas for shires, particularly the remote shires, such components are generally less than five per cent of their overall revenue. Municipal councils tend to expend most of their funds on core local government services, whereas most expenditures for the remote shires are on other services, and often with a grant or under contract provided by the Territory or Commonwealth governments. Power, water and sewage services, for example, are generally provided in remote towns by shires on behalf of the Territory government.

Local government is one of the largest employers of Indigenous people in remote areas of the Northern Territory, with the remote shires being the key players in that. Typically, for all eight large remote shires the Indigenous employment levels are higher than 60 per cent of the total council employment, and in some cases it is as high as 80 per cent. Some of the key factors that would sustain this and higher levels of such employment are long-term funding agreements that have built-in growth factors between local government and the Territory and Australian governments; adhering to the principle of 'subsidiarity' and accepting those functions that are best delivered by local government; financial assistance to improve the capacity of Indigenous employees, including the adoption and implementation of workforce development plans; red tape reduction in the areas of grant administration and consolidation; funding for adjustment in circumstances where the Commonwealth or Territory introduce policies that involve structural changes that result in functions no longer being performed by government, that incur greater costs for local government or that result in a loss of jobs for Indigenous employees. Given that it is the desire of both governments to maximise Indigenous employment, it is imperative that efforts continue to be made to address some of the challenges I have just mentioned. With the establishment of long-term leases in Aboriginal communities likely to take many years to complete across all of the 60 or more remote towns in the Territory, there is every chance that current arrangements to do with council rates will be affected. With the five-year township leases due to expire in August 2012 it seems inevitable that properties from which shires are currently collecting rates will be exempt. In other words, shires will lose rate revenues because properties will no longer be the subject of leases and will therefore become exempt from rates under the NT Local Government Act. Shires will be seeking compensation for this loss of revenue in the form of grants, which are equal to the rates set by each council for those properties affected.

Turning to alcohol abuse, although there are many examples of preventative and treatment services available to combat alcohol abuse, there does not seem to be much work done in the area of education. The Living with Alcohol program run by the Territory government some years ago was an excellent education program but unfortunately was not ongoing. The association would like to see more resources employed in the area of alcohol education.

The association supports the retention of the current restrictions on the availability of alcohol imposed under the Northern Territory emergency response measures and considers that restrictions are an important element of overall alcohol management and for reducing harm in communities. The association also considers that more needs to be done to restrict the sale of takeaway alcohol given that it can lead to uncontrolled consumption and often contributes the greatest harm in communities. This would require focus on restricting current and future liquor licences.

Regarding housing, the association supports the efforts of both the Territory and the Commonwealth government in both upgrading and providing new housing stock in remote communities and large urban towns in the Northern Territory. A major issue for local government in recent times has been the threat of inheriting inferior infrastructure through subdivisional development. It is clear, for example, that while provision was made for the construction and upgrade of houses in remote areas, insufficient funds were allocated for the construction of housing subdivisions. This matter has also been an issue for municipal councils. The association believes that both the Commonwealth and the Territory government need to correct this anomaly, as it is most unlikely that local governments will accept works that have not been done to Australian standards. If they were to accept these works they would inevitably inherit the legacy costs that they cannot afford. The Territory government has funded the association to develop subdivisional guidelines for remote townships. This will be useful in ensuring that standards are adhered to.

Moving on to governance, the association would like to see long-term commitments from both the Commonwealth and the Territory government in the area of elected member and staff training in local government, particularly for remote Indigenous shires. History has shown in the Territory that the take-up of such training is low unless it receives support from these two governments. Also, the cost of delivering training in the Northern Territory is high given the distances involved in getting trainers and attendees to venues. While commitments of late are most welcome, they will need to be sustained into the future as ongoing programs to cater for the turnover of elected members through elections as well as the turnover of staff.

The Commonwealth government has a strong preference for shires to be operating in individual towns and facilitating active community engagement in each of them. There are often many factors that contribute to the degree of people's participation in governance of their communities. For the shires the cost of doing business is always a significant consideration, particularly as it applies to the administration of local boards, and even more so for those shires that have high travel costs associated with air transport—for example, East Arnhem Shire.

They are just the key points. There is more to it, but you have the submission. If you have any questions I would be happy to answer them.

CHAIR: I have been desperately seeking some more time in tomorrow's program so that we could spend some more time with you, but there is just not a second to spare to do that. You know that the issue with the shires has come up consistently. The fact that the change for the shire was very similar in timing to the NTER has caused great confusion in terms of who is doing what. I just want to say that it does not mean that we did not value your evidence. The issues were very real. It is just that this issue of the shires has come up consistently.

Senator BOYCE: You would have heard earlier today comments around the fact that 'all this money'—I think that was the way it was put—or 'this great pile of money' was put into the NTER but only this tiny little bit got onto the ground. Could you give me the Local Government Association's perspective on that comment.

Mr Jan : The message that I get from the members is that there is frustration with a perceived imbalance between moneys that go to the administration and that which actually gets on the ground. One instance that was raised at a meeting that the mayors and presidents had with Mick Gooda last week was the amount of money that was being spent financing the GBMs compared to what the shires are looking for, for instance. They are saying that there is an $11 million shortfall in roads funding just to bring the current roads infrastructure up to speed.

Senator BOYCE: That is new roads or maintenance?

Mr Jan : Current roads, bringing them up to standard.

Senator BOYCE: Refurb sort of stuff.

Mr Jan : Yes. There is a concern amongst members with regard to that. That is just one example.

Senator BOYCE: If you want to think about that some more and give us some more information about that on notice, that would be good.

Mr Jan : Given the time, I am quite happy, if you want to document your questions, to take them back to the CEO and the members and get a full response for you.

Senator BOYCE: We have had comment—and it certainly is borne out by what we have seen when we have gone to communities during this inquiry—that there is a far greater need for what the government or governments are doing to be explained in communities. As the government body that is closest to communities, do you see any role for local government in explaining what measures are being proposed and what this will mean?

Mr Jan : Definitely. I will give you an example of that. The department that is handling the digital TV rollout is looking for community information people. In each of the towns, the shires employ shire service managers who basically do everything from the water, sewerage and everything to, in some instances, assisting with providing vehicles, buses and things like that. They are in contact with the community all the time, so in that instance they would be a perfect opportunity for a partnership to help government get its message out for that policy decision, because there is a lot of uncertainty in that—not that that is anything to do with the Stronger Futures legislation, but that is one instance.

Like I said before, the concept of subsidiarity is getting the organisation that is closest to the coalface and is most appropriate to deliver the service to deliver it. In many instances, in remote communities, local government are already doing that. They deliver Centrelink services in some towns. They deliver childcare services. They deliver—

CHAIR: Aged care.

Mr Jan : aged care and a host of other things. So they are already doing it. The key thing with that is that the short-term funding that comes with that makes it really difficult (a) to attract staff and (b) if we want to employ apprentices. For instance, some of the councils have civil construction units. They find it difficult to employ apprentices because they are only getting year-by-year funding. They cannot offer a four-year apprenticeship when they only have guaranteed funding for one year. As I said before, for some of the councils—for instance, Central Desert Shire Council and MacDonnell Shire Council—their Indigenous employment is up near the 80 per cent mark. It could be even more, I feel, if more support were given to those guys with regard to mentoring, because most of those positions are in the lower level. There are not a huge number in the upper management levels. Having said that, the mayors of all the shires are all Indigenous people. We have two or three CEOs who are Indigenous as well. So local government are working on doing that.

CHAIR: You are having elections soon, aren't you?

Mr Jan : Elections are on 24 March, yes. They will be interesting this year with the changes to the legislation with regard to proportional representation and employees being unable to nominate for local government. It will be interesting to see what happens then.

CHAIR: Thank you very much.

Mr Jan : No worries; thanks for your time.